Justin Mohn, a 32-year-old Pennsylvania man, is in police custody after allegedly murdering and decapitating his father, claiming the latter was a “federal employee” and a “traitor.” Before his arrest, Mohn posted a 14-minute video to YouTube in which he displayed his father’s severed head, proclaiming: "This is the head of Mike Mohn, a federal

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      6311 months ago

      Fortunately for those of us who don’t have a background in psychology: the folks who are experts tend to publish their findings!

      https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3092984/

      Highlights:

      Political liberalism and conservatism were correlated with brain structure

      Liberalism was associated with the gray matter volume of anterior cingulate cortex

      Conservatism was associated with increased right amygdala size

      So what do those parts do…

      Anterior cingulate cortex: error detection, anticipation of tasks, attention, motivation, and modulation of emotional responses

      Amygdala: formation and storage of memories associated with emotional events / emotional learning; fear conditioning.

      …so, yeah conservatives are literally, physiologically hypersensitive to fear, and more prone to acting on emotion. WHO’DA THUNK?!?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        611 months ago

        Although these results suggest a link between political attitudes and brain structure, it is important to note that the neural processes implicated are likely to reflect complex processes of the formation of political attitudes rather than a direct representation of political opinions per se. The conceptualizing and reasoning associated with the expression of political opinions is not necessarily limited to structures or functions of the regions we identified but will require the involvement of more widespread brain regions implicated in abstract thoughts and reasoning.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          711 months ago

          Were you wanting to build some kind of argument or hypothesis with that segment, or did you just want to leave it to your reader to assume whatever it is you’re thinking? Cuz the knee-jerk reaction your post evokes is that you’re attempting to dismiss an entire study based on a disclaimer about brains being complicated… but such an attack to your critical thinking skills would ofc be a hasty and unfair conclusion considering you haven’t contributed a single word of your own yet. So by all means, state your case.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            511 months ago

            Least chill comment I’ve seen on lemmy lol I thought I was on reddit for a second… It’s a quote from the study you posted not everyone online is trying to debate you.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              411 months ago

              I’m a bit worked up. RL shit, not you - forgive my tone.

              Meat of the last comment stands though: what’s your point? I know it’s a quote from the study, but that’s how studies work: they provide supporting or detracting evidence to whatever it is they’re evaluating. Even if that disclaimer wasn’t there at all, it’d still be implied bc no one study proves or disproves anything, they just contribute to a broader pool of knowledge that eventually leans toward something being accepted as truth.

              And right now that lean is toward conservatives being driven by fear and emotion.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                111 months ago

                Well I don’t really have a point myself, the study has a point which is emphasizing that these neural processes measured aren’t a direct representation of political opinions per se.

                I guess my only relevant opinion aligns with what they are saying in better ways in the study, to which I would add that it gets dicey whenever people’s thoughts/behaviors are reduced to something inherent about their biology. The authors of the study are putting in a good effort to avoid that reductive interpretation and explaining it very well. Biological indicators and many subsequent indicators are determined in complex ways by the conditions people are in and where they were born, etc.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              211 months ago

              LOL he’s been going on the attack around here. This concept has broken his brain and he’s just lost it.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        411 months ago

        conservatives are literally, physiologically hypersensitive to fear

        I don’t have a background in psychology either, but the prefix hyper- in medical contexts usually means something is abnormally and dangerously excessive in size, amount, etc. Yet from your quote there’s no reason to conclude the on-average increased amydagla is necessarily abnormally increased. It isn’t, it’s just bigger, it’s not automatically pathological.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          7
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          ‘hyper’ doesn’t have a qualifier in scale; it’s just an increase. Your arm muscles will hypertrophy after a single pushup… not by a significant amount, but by a higher than zero amount.

          My understanding of the amygdala situation is that it follows basically the same model: conservatives aren’t born with a massive amygdala that leaves them extra susceptible to fear and emotion; they do fear work-outs throughout their life by over-consuming shit like Fox News telling us the scary immigrants are here to out-breed us, or some preecher explaining how Jesus won’t let you into heaven if he sees you masturbating… over time they become the fear/emotional equivalent to a body builder; but when you start to look at the other parts of their brain, you might find they didn’t just skip leg day; but that the very concept of leg day is something they find offensive and actively oppose.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      1511 months ago

      You don’t have to have a background in psychology to read studies. It has been a topic increasingly researched lately, and the first part of their post is demonstrated by evidence in the studies.

      The conclusion about it being a mental illness is up for debate. It might be seen more as part of the human spectrum, like being gay or trans.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      1311 months ago

      It’s a good thing that I was able to read articles that professional psychologists wrote on the subject. But go ahead, be angry.

      • Then how about

        1. You link them when asked about your sources (or actually just link them when making such a Statement)
        2. You don’t present it as your own Opinion

        And yes, I am angry. Angry about all these self-proclaimed Experts these days who think they know everything and know more than Experts who studied this Subject for years.

        All those People who are Climatechange Experts but couldn’t even really tell you, what the Ozone-Layer exactly is.

        Or all those People who proclaim a Genocide in Gaza, but couldn’t even tell you where or how a Genocide is defined.

        If you’re not qualified, you’re allowed to just not say anything and not spew disinformation.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          4
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          This is common knowledge. Your ignorance is not my responsibility. You could easily have looked it up yourself but decided to project your ignorance on us instead.

          Your anger is yours, it has nothing to do with reality. It is something you should deal with through therapy, not by going on tirades against random people on Lemmy simply because you don’t have the experience and education to understand the things that they are talking about. We do not deserve to suffer your insecurity.

          Every single example you gave has a great deal of evidence behind it. You do not like that, and this causes you pain. This is all about you.

          Also references to Mao are probably not going to help you here.

          • I don’t even know where to start

            You made an imaginary picture of me based off of two comments. Then you used that nonexistent, imaginary version of me to make up your opinon and write this Comment in which you call me “ignorant”, “insecure”, “inexperienced”, “uneducated”, and just all-round talk me down.

            So do you now understand why i didn’t believe you?

            Your Comment here is nothing more that baseless Slander and i have no Reason to assume you did any more “Research” for your previous Comment than you did for this one.

            As such i do not see the Point in continuing this Conversation with you and will stop here.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              311 months ago

              This is so tedious that I am going to go ahead and block you. Take your fake outrage and go somewhere else.

      • I’ve fucking had it with unqualified people talking about stuff they don’t know anything about. If you don’t know anything about a Topic, you’re allowed to not say anything without spewing misinformation.

        I mean, there’s a Reason i don’t give my Opinion on Climatechange. Because i know that i am not qualified to talk about it. I know from personal experience how much university teaches you and how much you miss if you didn’t study that Subject, so i’m not giving my Opinion on a topic i didn’t study. And i expect others to do the same.